Stotts just gave one of the worst answers I’ve ever heard in a postgame.

I wonder, does current ownership have enough stability, direction, and basketball acumen to do that? Outside of Olshey, who could convince whom to make such a move? I doubt Olshey even would. So who?

 

I think Van Gundy passed his job interview calling that game. Sign me up. He can't do worse.

 

Agreed. Doesn't it look as if we never even practice against these traps? Lillard seems surprised every time and gets driven back; we lose a few more seconds off the clock and never do anything to make the other team pay for trapping. (oops, I guess Tpup said about the same thing)

 

The STUPIDITY of his answer is that

WHO WON THE FUCKING GAME WHERE STEPH SCORED 33 PTS IN THE SECOND HALF????

FUCKING GOLDEN STATE TERRY!!!!

WCF or not if he continues to lay eggs this MF needs to GO!!

 

Really??

I'm a damn homer.

Paint me yellow and cut my hair.

Stevie fucking Wonder could see how idiotic his pick and roll defensive scheme is.

HOW COME WE NEVER TRAP???

It works against us!!

HOW COME WE NEVER HEDGE???

It works against us!!

My 6th grade team that I COACH has a better pick and roll defensive scheme.

Yes I fucking said it.

 

I have defended Stotts but i cannot defend this and unless a small miracle happens and they find a way to slow Steph and Clay down then 1 thing will happen and then one thing prolly needs to happen. The obvious thing that will happen is the Blazers will get either swept or maybe they get lucky and WIN one game. Then what prolly needs to happen is a REAL REAL hard look into if Stotts is the right coach to lead this team in the future. I think Stotts is a good coach for a team wanting 1st to 2nd round playoffs series as there ceiling BUT i really question if he can lead this team to a ring excluding the roster questions aside for a moment. He either needs to be fired and let one of the young up and comers who are getting interviewed have the job but if one of the other guys get it they need to hire a assisant with HC and maybe someone with playoff success to help on the bench.

Even if they decide to keep Stotts i think they need to bring in someone as a consultant who can help Stotts when he really needs help or another PoV. I would say the obvious choice is someone who i am not sure even wants to be in the game anymore but ex-Blazer player and HC -- Adelman might be perfect for the role.

 

Quite true and wonderfully ironic.

 

This is not true. They were using the drop coverage when Collins was in there also. Read Jason Quick's article. He said all of the players were questioning Stotts' strategy.

 

Suspect. Not a miracle per my definition.

 

Nobody has been calling for Collins and Hood to replace them for months and years. They joined the team 3 months ago....

There isnt an answer. People mad at Stotts for not changing in the playoffs are just being silly to me at this point. Should he have tried more changes in the season? Maybe , but for the bulk of it, he didn't have the options he now has and he had to test them out and see how/where they fit.

NOW he has a couple guys who have started to prove themselves but its deep in the playoffs and you don't make these types of changes without an injury or a sure bet. Just because they have been good for us, doesn't mean its a sure bet to change 2/5ths of the lineup like that in the middle of a playoff series.

You guys are not being accurate with your timeline and statements....

Carry on.

 

Dame has been getting trapped since the Clippers four years ago. That is not a new problem.

We have played the Warriors countless times in the regular season and this is our THIRD series against them in the playoffs. Everyone, and I mean everyone, knows that you can't leave Curry and Klay wide open for three. It's just asinine.

There is no excuse for Stotts not having solutions to these problems.

 

One excuse would be, all other teams have the same issues? I get it. Open shots are never good, but sometimes an offense is bettere than the opposing defence.

Yeah but the topic of the convo I was addressing was making starting lineup changes in the playoffs.

No doubt there have been some issues in the past, but the focus, I thought, was on changing the lineup by starting the two guys we just acquired a few months ago. I dont agree with doing that. Anything else over the last 4 years ,is a different discussion? Or maybe Im focusing on one point of the discussion because thats what was being addressed?

 

Ive thought for years they needed to upgrade one of their starting forwards. Too inconsistent for my tastes. Anywho, Im not that down or anything game 2 is tomorrow.

 

The difference is you could see that Zach desperately wanted to go out and cover the shooter. He'd take a few steps in that direction, then he'd force himself to follow coach's orders.

 

Bingo. It had nothing to do with Kanter's defensive limitations. Our best defender (Collins) was doing the same thing.

If there's one silver lining to be found, it's that our players are immensely coachable, all being willing to follow suicidal marching orders. That tells me, there's potential for good defensive schemes if only they're given intelligent instructions.

 

Here's the thing, no one is asking Stotts to change.

We're asking him to ADJUST....

Our defense last night was the literal definition of insanity.

Let's keep trying the same thing and expect different results...

 

I just don't see how having our big guy engage the high screen, smother the guard to run him off the three, and hedge to slow him down on his drive, giving time for Dame to get back in front of Curry, would have been worse than giving Curry wide open threes. I may never get over it.